When is our rebuild no longer a rebuild?

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon In Flames

They should be used as supporting evidence. You shouldn't come to a conclusion about anything because of a single number. If you are seeing specific results and have advanced stats to back up why the results are the way they are, then that's fine. That's how these stats are meant to be used.

And... who exactly said otherwise?

The way Granteed is using these stats are absolutely horrendous.

No, the fact that I'm using them at all is what you find absolutely horrendous.

Especially since there are so many exceptions to what he quantifies as a playoff team.

You don't quantify a "playoff team". You're either a playoff team or you're not a playoff team. The Avs are a playoff team. The Flames were a playoff team last year.

I'm qualifying that there are playoff teams that rely excessively on elite goaltending, and I don't personally want to build a team that relies excessively on elite goaltending.

I'm quantifying that there are a few criteria I put together, of which eleven teams currently satisfy the criteria, and ten of those eleven are in a playoff spot right now, and the one that isn't probably won't satisfy the power play stat a month from now anyways and also doesn't have their starting goaltender.

Not sure what's so hard about that. The only reason it's been so aggressively attacked is because the words "corsi" and "fenwick" were in it and people want their soapbox to complain about something they can choose to ignore.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I think a point is being missed here.

There is a difference between a successful rebuild and a team no longer rebuilding.

The Flames essentially have their top 6 players penciled in for the next 5 years. (7 if we include this years draft choice/best case)

To me that signals the rebuild is over. That's the core. We've paid them. We've committed to them.

Of course the team will try to surround them with better players, but every team is trying to do this.

If your team doesn't know who/can't identify the 5-6 core players you are rebuilding.

Until your "core" includes a goalie I can't see how you are set to contend, which is how I define a completed rebuild.

[Jason14h]

But right now, the information is far too nebulous to be responsible for the conclusions that people like GranteedEV and CorsiHockeyLeague derive from it

It MAY be, or team are keeping it a secret for a competitive advantage!

I am not saying I even agree with GranteedEV and CorsiHockeyLeague. All I am saying is there picking advanced stats for a rebuild over thread discussion any worse then "After making conference finals" opinions?

It is just an opinion, and an opinion backed up with at least some sort of statistics included current playoff teams and where they rank.

It's hilarious to hear "Advanced stats are stupid. Anyone who uses them is an idiot" and yet most the post are random events or opinions that have no historical evidence to signify anything regarding the original question asked.

[Jason14h]

Until your "core" includes a goalie I can't see how you are set to contend, which is how I define a completed rebuild.

I would agree, but I would also say maybe we have done a crappy rebuild job in that case!

Does anyone really consider Edmonton rebuilding, or just crappy!

[GioforPM]

I've no objection to advanced stats as a diagnostic tool - I wish I understood/used them better. They are useful, IMO to undertand strengths and weaknesses of teams and players, and to work on those areas and/or get players who are better at them.

I don't think they can be the goal in and of themselves though - in other words I don't think the goal is to achieve a certain level in a stat. It's to achieve end result success, which IMO is having a team with a realistic shot at the Cup. So I don't think the team is finished its rebuild when certain advanced stats are acheived - I think those stats will indicate whether the direction is correct or not.

[Jason14h]

Do you think you can just take 23 players with the highest shooting percentage you can fit under the cap and become a contender? Because that sounds like the dumbest thing I've ever written.

Nope never said that. I don't know what (or if it even exists) the secret formula for judging the best lineup based on stats would be. If I did I would be making millions.

Doesn't mean that Chicago for example doesn't know a good formula

Chicago isn't leading the analytics revolution in hockey - they use internal analytics like every team does.

Well as long as you say so! I'll take ESPN's ranking of every team and the fact they say they are over your opinion?/facts?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

Everything in this thread is arbitrary. You're just singling mine out because it's presented via stats (and specifically, stats people here don't "like")....

I have readily agreed that every idea presented in this thread is to varying degrees arbitrary, but your's and Samiz's are the only ones that are absurdly so. Different in yours from all the other suggestions are the unacceptably narrow variability between the margins, and the farcical variability that the margins mean for possible fluctuations between "rebuilding" and "contending."

I have singled yours out because it is ridiculous and impractical, and am happy to do the same for others that I judge to be similarly unwieldy. However, I do find that by and large most of the thoughts presented in this thread are fairly well thought out and insightful.

[Bandwagon In Flames]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

And... who exactly said otherwise?



No, the fact that I'm using them at all is what you find absolutely horrendous.



You don't quantify a "playoff team". You're either a playoff team or you're not a playoff team. The Avs are a playoff team. The Flames were a playoff team last year.

I'm qualifying that there are playoff teams that rely excessively on elite goaltending, and I don't personally want to build a team that relies excessively on elite goaltending.

I'm quantifying that there are a few criteria I put together, of which eleven teams currently satisfy the criteria, and ten of those eleven are in a playoff spot right now, and the one that isn't probably won't satisfy the power play stat a month from now anyways and also doesn't have their starting goaltender.

Not sure what's so hard about that. The only reason it's been so aggressively attacked is because the words "corsi" and "fenwick" were in it and people want their soapbox to complain about something they can choose to ignore.

Northcrunk's brick wall is very relevant. You have listened to absolutely nothing I've said and just play the victim card thinking we're out to get advanced stat people. As I just mentioned like 20 god damn minutes ago, Advanced stats are a great support tool.

You are one of the biggest advocates of advanced stats but are doing more harm than good for the advanced stat community with how you are presenting these stats and the conclusions you are coming to.

I mean this in the most respectful way possible, but you lack the ability to comprehend and use advanced stats in a productive way. I'm done with this discussion that has been an endless circle of saying the same thing over and over trying to convince two stubborn posters that they are horribly wrong.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I was going to write yet another essay.. but I just decided to say this instead.

There are so many arbitrary ways to state that a rebuild is done.

I will simply accept the rebuild is finished when the Flames make the playoffs 2 years in a row. Now, the rebuild may need a 're-tool' or an 'adjustment' of sorts - some trades and so on to balance the roster, or take advantage of the deadline to try and stack up, etc., - but I can't think of another way to definitively state that a rebuild is completed.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Nope never said that. I don't know what (or if it even exists) the secret formula for judging the best lineup based on stats would be. If I did I would be making millions.

Doesn't mean that Chicago for example doesn't know a good formula



Well as long as you say so! I'll take ESPN's ranking of every team and the fact they say they are over your opinion?/facts?

ESPN has no idea what the various teams do with respect to analytics. None.

The only things they know are a) Chicago is good, and b) Bowman said they have some internal analytics that they strongly believe in.

When ranking teams on esoteric things like this, the good teams will always be ranked highly. "They're the best team, they must be doing something right!"

Well yeah, they have some great players.

[Jason14h]

ESPN has no idea what the various teams do with respect to analytics. None.

Maybe. Can you show me anything that says they/Chicago aren't at the top of the field. I haven't found anything when searching.

Let's be honest. NO ONE here knows what teams are doing. It's called a competitive advantage. I am just going off what is public knowledge/been reported.

[Jason14h]

Northcrunk's brick wall is very relevant. You have listened to absolutely nothing I've said and just play the victim card thinking we're out to get advanced stat people.

You called me dumb and thick because I was arguing that PERHAPS analytics aren't crap and that the same thing was said about baseball. At least he provides some thought out posts other then posting a wall or calling people names!

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Maybe. Can you show me anything that says they/Chicago aren't at the top of the field. I haven't found anything when searching.

Let's be honest. NO ONE here knows what teams are doing. It's called a competitive advantage. I am just going off what is public knowledge/been reported.

Great, we agree. Let's end there.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Different in yours from all the other suggestions are the unacceptably narrow variability between the margins,
I have singled yours out because it is ridiculous and impractical

Look, I appreciate your criticism however it's only ridiculous and impractical with narrow variability between margins, if you perceive it that way.

Come on, two years = 730 days. Therefore by your exaggerated logic, 736 days means that two years was too narrow a margin.

Only if you're going to present it that way is it going to appear that way.

and the farcical variability that the margins mean for possible fluctuations between "rebuilding" and "contending."

Actually, I never said there's an immediate jump from rebuilding --> contending. There's a massive middle ground I'm all too familiar with and that's the treadmill. But once the team has strong underlying and PP stats that's when I would be comfortable with the GM selling farm-assets to shore up weaknesses. No time before then. That's the only baseline I set. Unfortunately because I used two words that are offensive I set off the ticking time bomb that is "ANALYTICS ARE CRAP RAWR"

Again, read my original post in its entirety. All it says is that once my three criteria are satisfied, rebuilding will not be the excuse for this team's results. That excuse may be goaltending and it may be intangibles or a lack thereof. But right now the excuse is re-building and that is what causes the poor statistics (CF%/PP%). Never did I say we become an instant cup contender by taking more bad angle muffins, which has been the standard reaction to any mention of not-so-advanced underlying stats.

My single post has been a lightning rod for strawman arguements by people emotionally against "advanced stats" without even pondering what exactly I am saying. I've been told I'm confusing stats as the end goal (where?), I'm confusing stats as causation (where?), stats should never be used to support a position (uh, that's what they're for), etc, etc.

[driveway]

I think we can start thinking about the end of the rebuild once Engelland's contract is off the books.

That was a 'we're going to be bad, let's make sure we're at the cap-floor' signing for sure. So, we should start thinking about 2017-18 as the season where we should hope to be a solid playoff team/borderline Conference Finals contender.

[spuzzum]

Always interesting looking at historical threads. Is the rebuild officially over given the success half way through this current season? We only just missed the playoffs eight months ago.

The youth movement is certainly producing and we're much stronger with depth in most positions. Is the rebuild over after we win a playoff series as favorites?

[Enoch Root]

In a rebuild, you forego current success to build future assets. Once your team is focused on the now, and on playoffs, you aren't in a rebuild.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by spuzzum

Always interesting looking at historical threads. Is the rebuild officially over given the success half way through this current season? We only just missed the playoffs eight months ago.

The youth movement is certainly producing and we're much stronger with depth in most positions. Is the rebuild over after we win a playoff series as favorites?

We missed the playoffs 8 months ago because of Glen ####ing Gulutzan. No other reason. None.

[landshark]

Hell yes the rebuild is over. Funny, I was thinking of starting a thread to ask for peoples overall assessment of the degree of success of the rebuild in general. You just can't expect to come out of a rebuild with Crosby/Malkin... Calgary didn't, but they surely came out of it with a solid young core and a lot of possibility for the future. Frankly, this is about as good as one can hope for. Think of all of the rebuild failures in recent decades... seems to me that Calgary's rebuild is second only to the (incredibly lucky) Pittsburg rebuild.

[theslymonkey]

Originally Posted by landshark

Hell yes the rebuild is over. Funny, I was thinking of starting a thread to ask for peoples overall assessment of the degree of success of the rebuild in general. You just can't expect to come out of a rebuild with Crosby/Malkin... Calgary didn't, but they surely came out of it with a solid young core and a lot of possibility for the future. Frankly, this is about as good as one can hope for. Think of all of the rebuild failures in recent decades... seems to me that Calgary's rebuild is second only to the (incredibly lucky) Pittsburg rebuild.

The Hawks and Kings used to be pretty bad too. I would argue that the Flames mirrors those two team's rebuild.