"Take that Calgary Puck!" — SN960 and Calgary sports media discussion

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm certainly looking forward to an improvement of all of these counts into more tiers with more decision trees to separate truly high danger from just sort of high danger.

But until that day ... what we have is a better and fairer stat than just save percentage as a true high danger chance is defined as coming relatively in close and from a pass or tip that enters the range.

So it's something.

And it's clearly better than a Rittich fan sorting through recent goals and finding reasons why they're not his fault.

And we can disagree on that.

Stats simply do not capture what the shooter does with the shot.

The key to evaluating a goalie is really what he does with the shots he actually faces. Best they can do is establish groups of shot context

I still go back to the shots taken by TB, classify that game as a statistical outlier

Roughly 85 percent of all shots are expected to be stopped. Roughly 5 percent of shots generally will go in, right? It’s that other 10 percent of shots that make or break a goalie. That’s actually not a lot of shots at all. And those are the ones that make a goalie brutal or great

Relying on statistics without a good way to differentiate between those particular shots.. well, they are just not measuring the right things to make it worthy of drawing conclusions, without meriting further discussion

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Peter Maher would seldom say anything negative about the Flames, rarely stated opinions about players or coaches, and wasn't much of an insider. He was great at PBP but outside of some really good stories that's kind of all he offered of substance.

For some reason though it was endearing with Maher whereas with Wills it is irritating.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

For some reason though it was endearing with Maher whereas with Wills it is irritating.

Maher sounded sincere whereas Wills sounds like a paid shill sometimes?

[sa226]

With Wills I do find it a bit over the top. Which I guess is fine when the praise is warranted. But with Wills, he tends to be over the top when its not warranted at all. Being positive is great and all, but sometimes you need to rein it in and be a bit more measured.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

For some reason though it was endearing with Maher whereas with Wills it is irritating.

Peter was an old pro and never got into the speculations or rumors business. Wills is more opinionated and when you state an opinion it's not always going to win friends. I feel Maher is a really hard act to follow and I try to not get overly critical of any of these guys but I get why some don't like Wills as he's got a bit of homer in him.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Toonage

Maher sounded sincere whereas Wills sounds like a paid shill sometimes?

I don't think that's fair, and that's not really what I hear either. I do agree that Wills is irritating.

[stone hands]

theres a clear difference in my mind between trying to paint an insanely improbable playoff picture in a lost season vs going on the radio and defending mike smith or glen gulutzan day in and day out with an appeal to authority fallacy as your main tool for debate with your other being old time hockey platitudes while at the same time being indignant about it

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I don't think that's fair, and that's not really what I hear either. I do agree that Wills is irritating.

I said sometimes!

[MolsonInBothHands]

There is a difference in duties between Maher and Will's IMO. Maher was the insider who would regurgitate rumours that CP already knew, and would give tidbits on how the road trip is going. Wills is participating in the round table discussions and is trying to 'have a take'.

A lot of times the take or the way Wills presents them are cringe worthy homeristic. It's those times that Pinder has gradually challenged them more and more. You could hear both of them escalating their challenges of each other long before yesterday.

[CsInMyBlood]

Wills is very annoying to me. His calls during the game (especially when he gets all over the top spazzy and excited) and his radio persona are both irritating. Hey guys, what do you think about this? Hey guys. Hey guys. Guys. Cringe.

He seems so out of touch with reality when speaking about all things hockey.

Love it when Pinder doesn't agree with his horrible takes.

Some people seem to like him so I guess you can't please everyone.

[chummer]

Man I hope Wills doesn't read this thread.

I also hope Kirch does.

What happened to those changes in the new year??

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

And we can disagree on that.

Stats simply do not capture what the shooter does with the shot.

The key to evaluating a goalie is really what he does with the shots he actually faces. Best they can do is establish groups of shot context

I still go back to the shots taken by TB, classify that game as a statistical outlier

Roughly 85 percent of all shots are expected to be stopped. Roughly 5 percent of shots generally will go in, right? It’s that other 10 percent of shots that make or break a goalie. That’s actually not a lot of shots at all. And those are the ones that make a goalie brutal or great

Relying on statistics without a good way to differentiate between those particular shots.. well, they are just not measuring the right things to make it worthy of drawing conclusions, without meriting further discussion

OK can you quickly go through every shot in the league this year and give me a summary of your analysis of each goaltender so we can use your better than the current stats methodology to rank them all?

When can you get this to me?

And if you can't, I think we'll go with a objective measure to help us sort out goaltenders in the modern era, a number that is better than just straight save percentage.

[Shazam]

Maher did a lot of shilling too. Never as awful as Wills, but nonetheless he was a booster for the club.

Wills is just a lot clumsier at it.

[Toonage]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Maher did a lot of shilling too. Never as awful as Wills, but nonetheless he was a booster for the club.

Wills is just a lot clumsier at it.

This is a much better way of putting it than I did.

[bucksmasher]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

There is a difference in duties between Maher and Will's IMO. Maher was the insider who would regurgitate rumours that CP already knew, and would give tidbits on how the road trip is going. Wills is participating in the round table discussions and is trying to 'have a take'.

A lot of times the take or the way Wills presents them are cringe worthy homeristic. It's those times that Pinder has gradually challenged them more and more. You could hear both of them escalating their challenges of each other long before yesterday.

Well put. Pinder can be annoying too but I appreciate his challenge to Wills "rose colored glasses". I find Wills takes very uninteresting and long winded.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Maher did a lot of shilling too. Never as awful as Wills, but nonetheless he was a booster for the club.

Wills is just a lot clumsier at it.

Yeah I can see where this happens and understand how it grates on people.

Good way to frame it.

I really didn't care for Wills that first year, but truth is no one could have replaced Pete seamlessly. He has grown on me since to the point that he is ok now.

.

[Erick Estrada]

Yeah I actually don't mind Wills PBP now I'm used to it.

[Bingo]

Peter Maher came with the Flames. He had a great voice and he was the guy before social media and sports networks took hold.

He was good at his job and deserves the accolades, but he was given a pretty wide birth by all those that listened to him. Wills doesn't get that and is roasted often for a) not being as good as Maher (think he'd be the first to admit it) and b) coming after Maher.

Neither guy stepped out on many limbs to be negative to a team they are traveling with.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by MolsonInBothHands

By the way, does anybody know what the actual changes 960 is making?

Originally Posted by chummer

What happened to those changes in the new year??

Clearly they've been building towards eventual on-air fist fights.

Man I hope Wills doesn't read this thread.

With how easily he can be trolled on Twitter it would be a mighty entertaining read.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Bingo

OK can you quickly go through every shot in the league this year and give me a summary of your analysis of each goaltender so we can use your better than the current stats methodology to rank them all?

When can you get this to me?

And if you can't, I think we'll go with a objective measure to help us sort out goaltenders in the modern era, a number that is better than just straight save percentage.

Look, the analytics guys know the limitations of what they are measuring. Not sure why you seem defensive of it. They want to improve but know there is a practical limitation in manual data gathering

I see with my eyes things that contribute to making goals happen. These things aren’t measured. That is known. Models don’t use it yet. Why not talk about it?

I won’t ask you not to keep going with whatever you’re doing.

Just if you want to draw conclusions, why not acknowledge the limitations of the available data?