GAME DISCUSSION THREAD GDT: Philadelphia at Buffalo 1-14-14 at 7:30 PM EST

[Robviously]

 

Minus the fact Ullmark is currently leading the SHL with a .933sv%

 

or Cal Peterson in the USHL with a .918sv%

 

As for your comments on Miller, I agree that how he ages is extremely important to whether or not you keep him. Someone within the Sabres needs to make a call on that, sooner rather than later.

Ullmark can't even come to North America unti after next season and Peterson still has at least three years at Notre Dame after this year. So not only are these guys prospects, they're really long term prospects and anything can happen.

[LGR4GM]

Ullmark can't even come to North America unti after next season and Peterson still has at least three years at Notre Dame after this year. So not only are these guys prospects, they're really long term prospects and anything can happen.

I am just arguing we have goaltending prospects outside of hacket/lieuwen. Hell Enroth could end up being the guy somehow after all is said and done. The cupboard isn't empty though.

[darksabre]

 

 

So you're going to ignore my questions? I challenged you to completely neutralize every other variable to prove BFLO's PK was significantly different in that one particular year, in order to support TrueBlue's theory that 2010 just happened to be different and that Miller doesn't only step up in Olympic years. You failed.

 

I don't have to do any such thing. I'm not the one subscribing to an overly simplistic theory. The ball is in your court to stop looking like a fool. But if you don't want to do the leg work that's fine. I'll just go on being correct. I'm content with my correctness. And I will continue to make you aware of this until such time as you feel the need to actually support your theory.

[Stoner]

[/color][/color]

 

 

Since when do we believe anything Darcy says?

 

There is that, yes.

[dudacek]

Re: Ullmark and Peterson

 

If you want to put all your eggs into the basket of a sixth-round pick with an excellent stretch of 20 games, more power to you.

You might get lucky. Then again, you might not. And, as Robviously says, either of those guys is three years away, minimum.

 

I want to acquire a promising 22-year-old at the trade deadline AND pick a blue chip prospect before the end of round two this year.

 

This organization has been spoiled in net for most of the past 20 years and I do not want to see first-hand how the other half lives.

[JJFIVEOH]

I don't have to do any such thing. I'm not the one subscribing to an overly simplistic theory. The ball is in your court to stop looking like a fool. But if you don't want to do the leg work that's fine. I'll just go on being correct. I'm content with my correctness. And I will continue to make you aware of this until such time as you feel the need to actually support your theory.

 

I've provided my side of the story. The only thing you've brought is the coat tails of True Blue that you're riding on. And you can't even support that with any legitimate data. The best thing you guys can come up with to contradict that Miller doesn't in fact step up only during Olympic years is that his penalty kill save percentage was better for one year (which, if anything, helps to disprove your theory). You haven't provided anything to disprove my theory with the exception of 'maybe it was just an outlier year', which in itself is ironic that an advanced statistic advocate is using the 'maybe' argument to discredit somebody else.

 

You don't have to do such thing. But don't go telling me I'm wrong with nothing to back it up and then finish it off with name-calling.

[MattPie]

This organization has been spoiled in net for most of the past 20 years and I do not want to see first-hand how the other half lives.

 

This bears repeating. Other than late 2001 thru 2004*, and the various backups in the Interlockout years other than Enroth, Buffalo has had goaltending that is top-10 in the league and often in the conversation for top-5. That's literally 20 years of not worrying about that position.

 

* And that was Biron, who isn't bad.

[Samson's Flow]

Re: Ullmark and Peterson

 

If you want to put all your eggs into the basket of a sixth-round pick with an excellent stretch of 20 games, more power to you.

You might get lucky. Then again, you might not. And, as Robviously says, either of those guys is three years away, minimum.

 

I want to acquire a promising 22-year-old at the trade deadline AND pick a blue chip prospect before the end of round two this year.

 

This organization has been spoiled in net for most of the past 20 years and I do not want to see first-hand how the other half lives.

Funny thing is we though we accomplished that with Hackett in the Pominville trade. He is now languishing in the AHL and hasn't been a solid starter there this year. Goaltenders are a fickle bunch to project...

[spndnchz]

There is that, yes.

 

Well, besides the suffer part.

[Weave]

I've provided my side of the story. The only thing you've brought is the coat tails of True Blue that you're riding on. And you can't even support that with any legitimate data. The best thing you guys can come up with to contradict that Miller doesn't in fact step up only during Olympic years is that his penalty kill save percentage was better for one year (which, if anything, helps to disprove your theory). You haven't provided anything to disprove my theory with the exception of 'maybe it was just an outlier year', which in itself is ironic that an advanced statistic advocate is using the 'maybe' argument to discredit somebody else.

 

You don't have to do such thing. But don't go telling me I'm wrong with nothing to back it up and then finish it off with name-calling.

 

 

So, you are cherry picking data to support your position? :)

 

 

Actually, I think that the theory that PK SV% might be more influenced by a higher level of concentration (or whatever we want to call it) than even strength Sv% might have merit. I would like to note that there would be no good way of digging that out if it weren't for detailed statistical analysis. The kind you downplay as cherry picking.

[JJFIVEOH]

So, you are cherry picking data to support your position? :)

 

 

Actually, I think that the theory that PK SV% might be more influenced by a higher level of concentration (or whatever we want to call it) than even strength Sv% might have merit. I would like to note that there would be no good way of digging that out if it weren't for detailed statistical analysis. The kind you downplay as cherry picking.

 

For the record, I think there is a place for advanced statistics. It's one thing to cherry pick when you're concentrating on a particular subject or else it would defeat the purpose. It's another to cherry pick for the sake of eliminating what ever data was used to make the other person's point relevant. ;)

[Ross Rhea]

I don't have to do any such thing. I'm not the one subscribing to an overly simplistic theory. The ball is in your court to stop looking like a fool. But if you don't want to do the leg work that's fine. I'll just go on being correct. I'm content with my correctness. And I will continue to make you aware of this until such time as you feel the need to actually support your theory.

 

Ahh yes, that's what it's all about all the time with you isn't it. Ignorant arrogance, what a combo, eh!

[Weave]

For the record, I think there is a place for advanced statistics. It's one thing to cherry pick when you're concentrating on a particular subject or else it would defeat the purpose. It's another to cherry pick for the sake of eliminating what ever data was used to make the other person's point relevant. ;)

 

I don't believe for a second that TBPhD was trying to eliminate data until he found what he wanted to find. I deal with data mining enough to understand what he is doing, looking for trends in data to explain observations. And sometimes you find that the data doesn't match what you see, or think you see. You have badly mischaracterized and mocked what these stats are used for from the start. It tells me you don't understand how they are used.

[Robviously]

Funny thing is we though we accomplished that with Hackett in the Pominville trade. He is now languishing in the AHL and hasn't been a solid starter there this year. Goaltenders are a fickle bunch to project...

There was a chunk of this board that wasn't high on Hackett when we got him. It turns out they were right. (BTW, I took an optimistic view on what he'd do this year. See what happens when I'm optimistic?)

[JJFIVEOH]

I don't believe for a second that TBPhD was trying to eliminate data until he found what he wanted to find. I deal with data mining enough to understand what he is doing, looking for trends in data to explain observations. And sometimes you find that the data doesn't match what you see, or think you see. You have badly mischaracterized and mocked what these stats are used for from the start. It tells me you don't understand how they are used.

 

I know perfectly well what it's used for. You and TrueBlue aren't the only people to deal with analytics as far as their everyday lives. When I base my argument on overall save percentage and somebody turns around and says it's not a fair argument because his penalty kill save percentage is better than the rest of the years, well guess what........... penalty kill save percentage is also part of the game! Every goaltender has it, it exists every game and every year. It's like me telling you so and so had an average year because he scored 25 goals, and you turning around and saying that he had an 18 game drought, so he really had a good year. Guess what, you can't eliminate that 18 game drought so yes, he did have an average year.

 

As I've mentioned, IF one can back the theory up that Miller's penalty kill save percentage was the cause of the team around him and he in fact doesn't just step it up during Olympic years, then I'd admit that I'm wrong. However, nobody has yet to prove it had anything to do with the team around him. Which is ironic considering that would be an advanced analysis argument.

 

You can dress it up however you want and dissect it on every level. The fact remains that his save percentage has been significantly better on AND ONLY ON Olympic years.

 

-What was the Lalime's 5-5 and penalty kill numbers like in these years? If there was something so drastically different about that Sabres team that caused Miller's PK save percentage to rise to biblical proportions, and it wasn't Miller himself, his backup should have had similar numbers.

-What are the 5-5 and PK numbers like this year? I see that wasn't included on the list.

 

These are just a couple of relevant variables that need to be presented in order for the argument to be valid. If you're comparing Miller to his backup, you need to provide the backup's numbers as well as the supporting stats surrounding them. You can't just say the Olympic argument is invalid just because his 5-5 numbers are the same.

 

 

 

 

Bump

[Weave]

I know perfectly well what it's used for. You and TrueBlue aren't the only people to deal with analytics as far as their everyday lives. When I base my argument on overall save percentage and somebody turns around and says it's not a fair argument because his penalty kill save percentage is better than the rest of the years, well guess what........... penalty kill save percentage is also part of the game! Every goaltender has it, it exists every game and every year. It's like me telling you so and so had an average year because he scored 25 goals, and you turning around and saying that he had an 18 game drought, so he really had a good year. Guess what, you can't eliminate that 18 game drought so yes, he did have an average year.

 

As I've mentioned, IF one can back the theory up that Miller's penalty kill save percentage was the cause of the team around him and he in fact doesn't just step it up during Olympic years, then I'd admit that I'm wrong. However, nobody has yet to prove it had anything to do with the team around him. Which is ironic considering that would be an advanced analysis argument.

 

You can dress it up however you want and dissect it on every level. The fact remains that his save percentage has been significantly better on AND ONLY ON Olympic years.

 

 

 

Bump

 

I don't take issue with your opinion as stated in your last sentence. I believe that he steps up his game in Olympic years. It's your dismissal of how the stats are presented that I disagree with. You need to break data down into subsets to fully understand what it is trying to tell you. The science is in the art of selecting the proper subsets. It may very well be that the folks publishing these stats are using the wrong subsets. That would be worthy of criticism if you can back it up. Mocking a subset for being a subset is a clear sign to me of a lack of understanding.

[JJFIVEOH]

I don't take issue with your opinion as stated in your last sentence. I believe that he steps up his game in Olympic years. It's your dismissal of how the stats are presented that I disagree with. You need to break data down into subsets to fully understand what it is trying to tell you. The science is in the art of selecting the proper subsets. It may very well be that the folks publishing these stats are using the wrong subsets. That would be worthy of criticism if you can back it up. Mocking a subset for being a subset is a clear sign to me of a lack of understanding.

 

That's all well and good. But if you're going to break it down and imply that the reason Miller's PK stats are better because of the team in front of him then you need to have numbers to back it up. If it's the case then Lalime should have been no different. If it were the case then his PK stats should be great this year as well since TrueBlue said his Olympic year numbers improve because of his PK stats. The general argument as to why Miller's numbers change is because of the team in front of him. Well, he has arguably the worst team in history in front of him this year, somehow the PK argument doesn't fly. I'm not dismissing his advanced stats, I'm looking for some consistency in his argument. There is NOTHING to show that his 2010 PK stats were off the wall because of any other reason than his own level of performance. THIS is what I've been trying to get at.

 

You can choose all the subsets you want, but if you can't back up your argument with numbers to support said analysis then the theory is dis-proven and false. I'm not mocking any subset, I'm mocking the presentation by TrueBlue because there is NOTHING to support why Miller's 2010 PK stats are outside of his norm. If he's going to tell me I'm wrong and the reason for it is because of the team around him in 2010 lead to his abnormal save percentage on the PK, then present your reasoning for why the team was different. And that includes presenting Lalime's stats and backing it up with this years stats. This year is also relevant because he is trying to prove that Miller doesn't step it up only in Olympic years.

 

If you've noticed, nobody has yet to step up. Why? Because they can't. It's a bogus argument.

 

Time to watch the game. :flirt:

[Weave]

That's all well and good. But if you're going to break it down and imply that the reason Miller's PK stats are better because of the team in front of him then you need to have numbers to back it up. If it's the case then Lalime should have been no different. If it were the case then his PK stats should be great this year as well since TrueBlue said his Olympic year numbers improve because of his PK stats. The general argument as to why Miller's numbers change is because of the team in front of him. Well, he has arguably the worst team in history in front of him this year, somehow the PK argument doesn't fly. I'm not dismissing his advanced stats, I'm looking for some consistency in his argument. There is NOTHING to show that his 2010 PK stats were off the wall because of any other reason than his own level of performance. THIS is what I've been trying to get at.

 

You can choose all the subsets you want, but if you can't back up your argument with numbers to support said analysis then the theory is dis-proven and false. I'm not mocking any subset, I'm mocking the presentation by TrueBlue because there is NOTHING to support why Miller's 2010 PK stats are outside of his norm. If he's going to tell me I'm wrong and the reason for it is because of the team around him in 2010 lead to his abnormal save percentage on the PK, then present your reasoning for why the team was different. And that includes presenting Lalime's stats and backing it up with this years stats. This year is also relevant because he is trying to prove that Miller doesn't step it up only in Olympic years.

 

If you've noticed, nobody has yet to step up. Why? Because they can't. It's a bogus argument.

 

Time to watch the game. :flirt:

 

I don't believe there is a post, or sequence of posts, where TBPhD claimed that the team in front of Miller is why Miller's 2010 PK stats were skewed. If I missed a post where TB "blamed" Miller's change of performance on the team please point me to it. I suspect you've created a strawman out of multiple posters.

 

As for the consistency of his argument, his point all along regarding PK stats is that they are unreliable because they are a small data set. And that is a 100% defensible position. And LaLime's stats would be even more unreliable for the same reason. If your inferences are accurate you would know that. ;)

[JJFIVEOH]

OK

[josie]

There we go! Beautiful.

 

Oh hey wrong thread. WELP I'm tired. Sorry.

[Jsixspd]

Well I don't think a Lindy-like farewell PC was in order. What would you do if you just got canned from a job in a town where you were almost universally vilified? There's your answer as to what DR has been up to.

 

I wouldn't be opposed to parading him down main street in an ox cart, forced to wear a dunce-cap, in front of jeering. slavering crowds shouting "off with his head" or something like that. LOL

 

exactly lol we get to see which of our goalies is better on the bench. I hate it but it looks like USA hockey is going to get what they want and Quick will be the starter.

 

Well that sucks, so much for any but a remote chance of Miller and Enroth facing each other on ice. :(

[Jsixspd]

He was getting pressure along the boards on the Filly side of the neutral zone and you wanted him to work the puck (w/ his linemates changing no less) behind the Sabres' net? He'd just turned the puck over twice on that same shift; sending the puck deep was the right play there. Get the puck deep and get off the ####ing ice is the correct play there. The Phlyers were 189' away from the Sabres' goal & there should have been 5 sets of fresh legs on the ice to keep them ~100' from Jhonas. There is no way that goal is on Leino.

 

If Leino tried again and failed again to make a play at that point and had turned the puck over in the neutral zone, THEN you'd've had a case.

 

I dunno - there's a mix of line change strategies, and of course we'll see a player cross center ice, dunk it in the opposing zone, and return to the bench.... but it seems to me you need to read the other team, and the way they're set up, and which players are on the ice and their scoring potential, how much time is left in the game, who from your own team is on the ice, and a lot of variables like that. Philly can be a dangerous scoring team -and with only 30 seconds they aren't gonna worry about a line change because they'll get a nice rest in 30 seconds - so they'll just go all out and give it everything they've got physically in a last ditch effort. And that's what happened.

 

And again, I don't know how much of it was Leino's choice - if it was a direct command of Ted Nolan to dunk it in there, then that's ok I guess. But if it was partly Leino's decision.....anyways it was just the frosting on the cake for me of a frustrating night watching that slug playing.

[apuszczalowski]

I wouldn't be opposed to parading him down main street in an ox cart, forced to wear a dunce-cap, in front of jeering. slavering crowds shouting "off with his head" or something like that. LOL

 

 

 

Well that sucks, so much for any but a remote chance of Miller and Enroth facing each other on ice. :(

I would be surprised to see Enroth even Dress on the bench, let alone get into a game, or start against the US team. He won't make it past Lundqvist and theres a very good chance that Gustavson will be the backup with Enroth the #3

[Ross Rhea]

I would be surprised to see Enroth even Dress on the bench, let alone get into a game, or start against the US team. He won't make it past Lundqvist and theres a very good chance that Gustavson will be the backup with Enroth the #3

 

Why not? I don't think Gustavson is better than Enroth. What makes you think Gustavson is better? Surely can't be stats related opinion.

[Eleven]

Why not? I don't think Gustavson is better than Enroth. What makes you think Gustavson is better? Surely can't be stats related opinion.

 

I agree. I think Enroth will be the #2 and may even see game time against his current NHL coach if that game gets out of hand.