[PGT] Flames score 4 unanswered and beat Sens 6-3

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by D as in David

Those numbers don't take into account the quality of the opposition or deployment, do they? If not, that could go a long way to explaining some of the disparity between the stats and the eye test.

Correct, among other things.

So what conclusion should you draw, when you're looking at them?

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Correct, among other things.

So what conclusion should you draw, when you're looking at them?

That you're both right?

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think this is just another case of seeing what you want to see. It's easy to look at that list and say 'sure'. But if the stats had Sharangovich in the top group, pretty much everyone would say 'sure, makes sense'.

In what world are Pospisil and Ruzicka the best defensive forwards? And in what world are Lindholm and Sharangovich among the worst defensive forwards on the team?

These stats produce garbage. How can anyone look at that list and think it is enlightening you with respect to defensive play?

The problem still isn't the stats - it's the interpretation of the stats. The stats Bingo shared are just raw numbers of the outcome happening on ice. If people take that and say "xyz is the worst defensive forward on the team because of it" then they are not understanding the nuance in the stats.

Bingo and the stats never said "Pospsiil and Ruzicka are the best defensive forwards" they are saying "they have been on the ice for the fewest expected goals against" which are two very different things.

When I look at those numbers what I see is:

Group 1: Guys who are playing more sheltered minutes and getting good defensive results because of that.

Group 2: Guys who are playing tough minutes but still above water when it comes to defensive results.

Group 3: There are two sub-groups here to me: Lindholm/Sharangovich/Huberdeau - Guys who are playing more / tougher minutes and are struggling a little bit with the defensive results in those minutes.

Duehr/Dube: Guys who have played sheltered minutes and are still getting poor defensive results.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

The problem still isn't the stats - it's the interpretation of the stats. The stats Bingo shared are just raw numbers of the outcome happening on ice. If people take that and say "xyz is the worst defensive forward on the team because of it" then they are not understanding the nuance in the stats.

Bingo and the stats never said "Pospsiil and Ruzicka are the best defensive forwards" they are saying "they have been on the ice for the fewest expected goals against" which are two very different things.

When I look at those numbers what I see is:

Group 1: Guys who are playing more sheltered minutes and getting good defensive results because of that.

Group 2: Guys who are playing tough minutes but still above water when it comes to defensive results.

Group 3: There are two sub-groups here to me: Lindholm/Sharangovich/Huberdeau - Guys who are playing more / tougher minutes and are struggling a little bit with the defensive results in those minutes.

Duehr/Dube: Guys who have played sheltered minutes and are still getting poor defensive results.

Yes, I understand all that. And if that is what people said when they quoted those stats, then fine. But they don't. People look at xGA and interpret that as good or bad defensively BECAUSE it is a counting stat that is measuring expected goals against. But as we have all said several times, and you are saying again now, there are many other factors - some, more important (like usage), that have significant impacts on the numbers.

So, the way they are used, they are flawed. And based on the name, they are trying to determine how effective a player is at controlling expected goals against - WHICH THEY DO NOT (because of the other factors, which they are not considering).

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by getbak

Yeah, and dropping from 5th to 6th in 2016 didn't really hurt the Flames either.

The Rangers may have been better off staying at 6th in 2019 because the players chosen 6th, 7th, and 9th all have more points in fewer games than the guy they got 2nd overall.

Also nice to have a Norris candidate just pick you as the team he wants to play on.