Advanced Statistics: The Corsi Number

[Iron Crotch]

Why not look at on-ice versus off-ice relative +/- too? (seems to pass the "eye test" a bit more than the Corsi)

 

http://www.behindthe...+52+53+54+55+56

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

You've obviously come into this topic with a bias against it so I don't see much point in arguing with you. The Corsi number was created to address the sample size problem with traditional statistics. It's meant to look at over 100 shot attempts per game. You've cherry picked two. Congratulations.

 

We've got Darcy on record saying blocked shots is the most overrated stat there is. Now that you've explained Corsi#, I see why he says that. If he believes in the #, blocked shots are actually a negative.

 

We've got a member of the organisation inventing this number.

 

We've got posters questioning why a player would have a good Corsi# yet to the eyes seem like an underachiever, soft player, etc.

 

I gave an example that if I understood correctly, was valid.

 

We've got 2 guys in Regehr and McNabb who this team hasn't seen since a guy like McKee and maybe Mike Ramsey/Schoenfeld rolled into one....yet they are at the bottom of the Corsi#. Is it not valid to ask if the reason we have not seen players of that physical caliber who obviously are greatly valued around the league and even considered untouchable by some.......is because Darcy, who is on record with Paul Hamilton as discounting some of that style of play and who employs Corsi as his righthand man in the pressbox, values these Corsi Numbers in his acquisitions and makeup?

 

 

Once again I thank you for pointing this out. So does the owner of my preferred liquor store.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCaWBFAJL44

 

 

Haha! You guys have to go to 4:55 and watch this. Call me a dinosaur...but pretty funny.

 

In Corsi's defense, I read up a little and it looks like he started the number to figure out goalie fatigue.....but a few teams are said to use these numbers to make trades and signings.

[Iron Crotch]

In Corsi's defense, I read up a little and it looks like he started the number to figure out goalie fatigue.....but a few teams are said to use these numbers to make trades and signings.

 

Interesting that Ehrhoff was 5th in the NHL in Corsi rating last year and we heavily targeted him in the off-season. Coincidence?

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Interesting that Ehrhoff was 5th in the NHL in Corsi rating last year and we heavily targeted him in the off-season. Coincidence?

 

MacArthur was 3rd......whoops! :w00t:

 

And nothing against Wraith for doing the work and bringing this up. I've spent some time looking into it and learned some. Always better to have too much information and ignore it, than not enough.

[Who Else?]

If Gragnani is our best defenseman by far and Stafford at forward than this stat is just a bunch of rubbish.

 

Just because you put a bunch of ingredients in a stew does not make it a good one.

 

You can make up any contort any stat line to prove that any particular player is the best.

 

I agree that this makes sense in he fact that it seems to be the model Darcy is using, but Wow!

 

If the stat does work, and the Sabres have two anomolies at two different positions, what does that even mean?

[TheChimp]

OK....this idea really has me steaming.....thank you Wraith for bringing it up.

 

When I have enough free time, I am going to develop my Regier/Ruff Return on Investment Number. Here is what it will be. Average cash outlay on players on the ice for team, divided by points in the standings, divided by 1.0 if missing playoffs, 1.07 for making playoffs, 1.17 making the second round, 1.30 making the conference finals and 1.45 making the Stanley Cup. The multiplier comes from expected additional revenue in hosting home games in those rounds. The average cash outlay negates injuries in the starting lineup.

 

I figure this is a nice fair way to evaluate the bang for the buck an owner gets out of his GM/coach combo.

 

If Carp wants to take on this task, he can reap the rewards as GM's and coaches around the league drop like flies. I have an idea where the first opening would be this year.

I'd like to see these results!

[RazielSabre]

If Gragnani is our best defenseman by far and Stafford at forward than this stat is just a bunch of rubbish.

 

Just because you put a bunch of ingredients in a stew does not make it a good one.

 

You can make up any contort any stat line to prove that any particular player is the best.

 

I agree that this makes sense in he fact that it seems to be the model Darcy is using, but Wow!

 

If the stat does work, and the Sabres have two anomolies at two different positions, what does that even mean?

 

+1, nice post.

[LabattBlue]

Maybe Corsi should devote more time to helping Miller and Enroth get out of their slumps, and less time with some half baked number crunching that results in false positives(Gragnani and Stafford grade highly? :lol: ).

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

The Sabres total Corsi Number for the game last night in Washington was +23. It is obvious that this team is dominant and some of us are just being negative because our mothers were incapable of breastfeeding us when we were infants.

 

Seriously.....Harrington Twittered the number last night. Darcy is proud of his boys this morning.

[LTS]

The Corsi number is a 5-5 number. It doesn't account for power play and penalty kill. So the shorties we give up and the power play goals we give up won't reflect in anyone's stats.

 

So, you know, when Gragnani turns the puck over on the power play and Giroux steams down the ice and wins the game for Philly that poor play won't show up in the Corsi number.

 

Buffalo is tied for second last in the league giving up 5 shorties. Somehow the Devils have managed to give up 11 shorties this season (wow.. just.. umm wow). Of course if there were a stat for shots allowed while on the PP we might find Buffalo even higher.

 

Other interesting statistics... something to quantify in the "character" category.

 

Buffalo is an impressive 10-1 when leading after the first period. They are also an unimpressive 1-9 when trailing after the first period. They are 13-0 leading after 2 and are 1-15 when trailing after 2. I excluded the games that made it to OT. But from those numbers I see a team that quits once they are down.. this speaks to a lack of ability to fight through adversity which goes back to the question of accountability and character on the Sabres.

 

For reference, Minnesota is 9-7 when trailing after 1 and 3-10 when trailing after 2. What I would like to see if the goal margins at each of the ends to know whether they are being blown out or not. I know how the Sabres generally fair but I don't know someone like Minnesota. If it's any indication overall the Sabres are GF/GA by period: 37/30, 28/41, 29/35, and Minnesota is: 25/28, 34/30, 29/27.

 

Interesting numbers, it does underscore my perception that the Sabres are the absolute worst with the long change. They are 28th in goals for in the 2nd and 6th most goals allowed in 2nd. Is it conditioning? Perhaps. Is it that the Sabres shifts appear to be about 10-15 seconds shorter than other teams? I can't find a stat for that yet. But I have always felt the Sabres "roll the lines" a bit too much. More changes in the 2nd mean your team is potentially out of position more due to the distance to travel.

 

In any event.. statistics can go anywhere. The Corsi number is intriguing and it's nice to have it explained. I suppose we'll see how well it compares over time but I would never discount the PP/PK impact on the game.