Jbot needs to go

[LGR4GM]

Just now, pi2000 said:

You misunderstand.  

I looked at two sets of teams, top 5 and bottom 5  in each of those categories.

I answered the following...

How many of those top 5 and bottom 5 teams are playoff teams?

How many of the top 5 and bottom 5 teams also rank in the top 10 overall points standings?

You said 4 of the top 10 teams.  Is 4 of the top 10 or 4 of the top 5

2 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

You misunderstand.  

I looked at two sets of teams, top 5 and bottom 5  in each of those categories.

I answered the following...

How many of those top 5 and bottom 5 teams are playoff teams?

How many of the top 5 and bottom 5 teams also rank in the top 10 overall points standings?

The evidence shows that winning teams do better in those categories, than losing teams... except for takeways/60min where there was no correlation.

I re read it again. It doesn't show correlation. 

[pi2000]

17 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You said 4 of the top 10 teams.  Is 4 of the top 10 or 4 of the top 5

I re read it again. It doesn't show correlation. 

The top 10 teams overall by points are WSH, BOS, STL, PIT, TBL, CBJ, NYI, DAL, PHI, VAN.

How many of those teams rank in the top 5 in FOW% ? 3 out 5 = 60%

How many of those teams rank in the bottom 5 in FOW%?  0 out of 5 = 0%

60% of teams who are best at winning faceoffs are playoff teams, none of the teams who are worst at winning faceoffs are playoff teams.    Where do the Sabres rank?  DFL

How many of those teams rank in the top 5 for blocks/60min? 4 out 5 = 80%

How many of those teams rank in the bottom 5 for blocks/60mni?  2 out of 5 = 40%

That tells me that if you want to be top team, you better be willing and able to block shots.   Where do the Sabres rank?  DFL

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by pi2000

[LGR4GM]

There's so much wrong here it hurts. 

[pi2000]

14 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You most assuredly change the game for the bolded. Also 2 of the top 10 for hits... that's 20%. Some correlation. 

 

2 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

There's so much wrong here it hurts. 

 

Sorry, tried to dumb it down for you best I could.    If you don't get it, you don't get it.   

[Gatorman0519]

not sure if this was posted.... but spot on

[MODO Hockey]

4 hours ago, Gatorman0519 said:

not sure if this was posted.... but spot on

Spot on, indeed. 

This is so sad but true, this team is such a wastebag that its incredible at this moment. I believe we have enough talant to win alot of games but there has to be
someone that does this from the locker room and behind closed door, not going around saying "Go bills, ill buy flowers to all of you. Thank you"

 

[TrueBlueGED]

8 hours ago, Randall Flagg said:

And pi's input shouldn't be lost or ignored either.

dudacek just has me feeling like I do when watching Bolt run 9.58, or watching Eichel slice through defenders and pick corners 

It should, actually. He's making bad faith arguments to cause a ruckus. Shame this one is far less entertaining than his comically incorrect Matthews shtick. The best part is most of what he's trying to prove with respect to certain stats and team success have been analyzed longitudinally elsewhere, and his arguments thoroughly obliterated. 

[LGR4GM]

8 hours ago, pi2000 said:

 

 

Sorry, tried to dumb it down for you best I could.    If you don't get it, you don't get it.   

Oh I understand what you did. You don't understand why what you did is faulty. 

1 hour ago, TrueBlueGED said:

It should, actually. He's making bad faith arguments to cause a ruckus. Shame this one is far less entertaining than his comically incorrect Matthews shtick. The best part is most of what he's trying to prove with respect to certain stats and team success have been analyzed longitudinally elsewhere, and his arguments thoroughly obliterated. 

Yup. Even his own stats break his argument. 

Edited February 6, 2020 by LGR4GM

[Gatorman0519]

5 hours ago, MODO Hockey said:

Spot on, indeed. 

This is so sad but true, this team is such a wastebag that its incredible at this moment. I believe we have enough talant to win alot of games but there has to be
someone that does this from the locker room and behind closed door, not going around saying "Go bills, ill buy flowers to all of you. Thank you"

 

Like he said, we are at the border of "unprecedented" in our franchises continual state of ineptitude.

[Kruppstahl]

6 hours ago, MODO Hockey said:

Spot on, indeed. 

This is so sad but true, this team is such a wastebag that its incredible at this moment. I believe we have enough talant to win alot of games but there has to be
someone that does this from the locker room and behind closed door, not going around saying "Go bills, ill buy flowers to all of you. Thank you"

 

"This shouldn't be a rebuild.  The rebuild should be over.  It's been long enough.  A decade isn't a rebuild...it's a commitment to complete and total mediocrity."

Holy ***** I love this guy.

The number for this season is "50".

The number for next season is going to be "10".

?

 

[Kruppstahl]

1 hour ago, Gatorman0519 said:

Like he said, we are at the border of "unprecedented" in our franchises continual state of ineptitude.

Something he didn't go into in that video but worth a look is the number of points we have missed a playoff position by over the course of our drought.  It's not good.  We have been missing by a lot, say 15 or more.  

I think there may be a record in that alone already. 

[TrueBlueGED]

Under the "The Pegulas don't like to be embarrassed" theory of how they operate, all of the heat coming on the organization (national media, Ted Black, local radio), I'd imagine Botterill's seat is getting warmer. 

[WildCard]

1 minute ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Under the "The Pegulas don't like to be embarrassed" theory of how they operate, all of the heat coming on the organization (national media, Ted Black, local radio), I'd imagine Botterill's seat is getting warmer. 

I agree, but what does that really do for us? Murray, Byslma, Housley...all had the same build up to getting fired, and, well, nothing changed with the next guy. Same failed crap

[...]

8 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Under the "The Pegulas don't like to be embarrassed" theory of how they operate, all of the heat coming on the organization (national media, Ted Black, local radio), I'd imagine Botterill's seat is getting warmer. 

I think that theory sits just underneath the "Kim Pegula is adamant she knows what she's doing" theory in the hierarchy of Pegula operational theories.

[pi2000]

5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh I understand what you did. You don't understand why what you did is faulty. 

Yup. Even his own stats break his argument. 

Most of the teams who rank in the top 5 for FOW% are playoff teams.

None of the teams who rank in the bottom 5 for FOW% are playoff teams.

And your conclusion is that there's no correlation between FOW% and winning?   OK

 

4 of the 5 top teams for blocked shots/60min are playoff teams.

Less than half of the bottom 5 ranked teams for blocked shots/60min are playoff teams.

How is that not meaningful?

Buffalo is DFL in both categories.    I get that doesn't mean they should launch Rienhart into the sun because he doesn't contribute positively to either category (or hits or takeaways), but don't you think if Buffalo had at least 1 or 2 guys who could win +50% of their draws they would have a better chance to win?   Or a couple guys who excel at blocking shots?  Maybe a few more blocked shots saves a goal every 5-10 games or so.... you don't think that's helpful?

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, pi2000 said:

Most of the teams who rank in the top 5 for FOW% are playoff teams.

None of the teams who rank in the bottom 5 for FOW% are playoff teams.

And your conclusion is that there's no correlation between FOW% and winning?   OK

 

4 of the 5 top teams for blocked shots/60min are playoff teams.

Less than half of the bottom 5 ranked teams for blocked shots/60min are playoff teams.

How is that not meaningful?

Buffalo is DFL in both categories.    I get that doesn't mean they should launch Rienhart into the sun because he doesn't contribute positively to either category (or hits or takeaways), but don't you think if Buffalo had at least 1 or 2 guys who could win +50% of their draws they would have a better chance to win?   Or a couple guys who excel at blocking shots?  Maybe a few more blocked shots saves a goal every 5-10 games or so.... you don't think that's helpful?

You keep cherry picking and you keep refusing to show numbers. If team A has 100 hits and team B has 110 hits and team B is Boston and team A is Buffalo, I am suppose to believe those 10 hits matter? Are you serious? 

Here's a great example. Buffalo, 18.6 hits per game. Ottawa 27.4 hits per game. Colorado 18.3 hits per game. St Louis 20.1 hits per game. Chicago 23.3 hit per game. Boston 23.9

Wow, what a great correlation we have. Ottawa the worst team in the league has more hits. Chicago a very bad team in the league has more hits. St Louis the best team in the league has a whipping 1.5 more hits than Buffalo a game. Real game changer that is. 

Here's the list of raw data, since you CONTINUE to refuse to show us that, to show how faulty this really is: Hits per game. I put playoff teams in bold. 

1. NYI: 29.0
2. Pitt: 28.4
3. OTT: 27.4
4. LV: 27.3
5. MON: 27.1
6. WASH: 24.3
7. BOS: 23.9
8. CHI: 23.3
9. WINN: 23.1
10. TB: 22.8
11. DET: 22.4
12. SJ: 22.3
13. NYR: 21.9
14. EDM: 21.9
15. ANA: 21.8
16. DAL: 21.6
17. PHIL: 21.3
18. LAK: 21.1
19. CLBJ: 20.3
20. NJD: 20.2
21. STL: 20.1
22. ARI: 19.5
23. VAN: 19.1
24. BUF: 18.6
25. COL: 18.3
26. CGY: 18.2
27. FLO: 17.8
28. NASH: 17.7
29. TOR: 16.8
30. CAR: 16.7
31. MINN: 16.3

 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by LGR4GM

[Randall Flagg]

2019-2020
5 teams in the top 10 of faceoff percentage are in the top 10 of NHL standings this year. 1 of the top 10 teams are in the bottom 10 of the NHL standings.
4 of the teams in the bottom 10 of faceoff percentage are in the top 10 of the NHL standings this year. 4 of the bottom 10 faceoff teams are in the bottom 10 of the standings.

2018-2019
4 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 3 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.
3 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 4 bottom 10 F% teams are in bottom 10 of standings.

2017-2018
4 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 2 of top 10 F% teams in bottom of standings.
2 bottom 10 F% teams in to p10 of standings, 5 bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 standings.

2016-2017
2 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 4 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.
4 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 2 of the bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.

2015-2016
3 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 2 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings
2 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 6 bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.

2014-2015
4 top 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 3 top 10 F% teams in bottom 10 of standings.
3 bottom 10 F% teams in top 10 of standings, 3 bottom 10 F% teams in bottom 10 % of standings

Got bored at this point.
So, 22/60 top 10 faceoff teams in the last 6 seasons have finished in the top 10 of the standings. 15/60 top 10 faceoff teams finish in the bottom 10 of the standings, an average of one fewer great faceoff team per year.

14/60 of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league have finished in the top 10 of the standings, while 20/60 of the bottom 10 faceoff teams in the league have finished in the bottom 10 of the standings. Again, an average of one more bottom 10 faceoff team per year is bottom 10 than top 10.

Of ten top ten faceoff teams in a given year, 3.6 of them are top ten NHL teams, 2.5 of them are bottom ten NHL teams, and 4.9 of them are somewhere in the middle.
Of ten bottom ten faceoff teams in a given year, 2.3 of them are top ten NHL teams, 3.3 of them are bottom ten NHL teams, and 4.4 of them are somewhere in the middle.

I have to say, this is hardly riveting stuff. It seems to be barely better than a coin flip. Sorta like faceoffs themselves, with even the BEST centers in the league at them.

This is not to discount the idea that it's really nice to have guys who are great at faceoffs taking them in important moments. It was nice to watch ROR break NHL faceoff win records as we plummeted to last place before trading him. But I wouldn't let this skill drive my search for players or my team building moves (though, in building a team with a strong center spine, I have to think you'd come across good faceoff players as good centers tend to have this skill).

Gonna spread out the above numbers to count how many times each faceoff split has given us playoff teams:
2014/15: top 10: 5, bottom 10: 6
2015/16: top 10: 6, bottom 10: 3
2016/2017: top 10: 5, bottom 10: 5 (with 3 other bottom 10 teams filling out the next 3 closest playoff teams)
2017/18: top 10: 6, bottom 10: 5
2018/19: top 10: 7, bottom 10: 4
2019/20: top 10: 6, bottom 10: 6

So over 6 years, 35 of the 96 NHL playoff teams have been top 10 in faceoffs, while 29 of the 96 playoff teams have been in the bottom 10 of all faceoff teams. Try doing the same thing for goals, goals against, goal differential, and even shot metrics, and they'll be far more decisive in doling out playoff spots, tbh. The score was a couple loser points away from being 35-33. Again, this argument isn't particularly riveting from a team-building view, even if it's of course better to win faceoffs than to lose them. I think the idea is just that faceoffs comprise a couple dozen out of hundreds of different kinds of puck battles that happen in a given game, so while the advantage is obviously good for any puck battle, their effect by themselves on the standings can be overstated.

Also, I've been noticing that so many times, a center can "win" the battle such that the puck's trajectory on the ice is back towards his own team, while someone else then loses a battle and the puck goes to his opponent. The center gets the L even if he does the better job at puck drop. The opposite happens just as often. It muddies the water quite a bit for stats that have the characteristic that ROR averages only 1.6 more faceoff wins per GAME than a league average centerman. It's relevant - but as game-changing as a billion other things you can also control in your quest for team building







 

 

[Randall Flagg]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

You keep cherry picking and you keep refusing to show numbers. If team A has 100 hits and team B has 110 hits and team B is Boston and team A is Buffalo, I am suppose to believe those 10 hits matter? Are you serious? 

Here's a great example. Buffalo, 18.6 hits per game. Ottawa 27.4 hits per game. Colorado 18.3 hits per game. St Louis 20.1 hits per game. Chicago 23.3 hit per game. Boston 23.9

Wow, what a great correlation we have. Ottawa the worst team in the league has more hits. Chicago a very bad team in the league has more hits. St Louis the best team in the league has a whipping 1.5 more hits than Buffalo a game. Real game changer that is. 

Here's the list of raw data, since you CONTINUE to refuse to show us that, to show how dumb this really is: Hits per game. 

1. NYI: 29.0
2. Pitt: 28.4
3. OTT: 27.4
4. LV: 27.3
5. MON: 27.1
6. WASH: 24.3
7. BOS: 23.9
8. CHI: 23.3
9. WINN: 23.1
10. TB: 22.8
11. DET: 22.4
12. SJ: 22.3
13. NYR: 21.9
14. EDM: 21.9
15. ANA: 21.8
16. DAL: 21.6
17. PHIL: 21.3
18. LAK: 21.1
19. CLBJ: 20.3
20. NJD: 20.2
21. STL: 20.1
22. ARI: 19.5
23. VAN: 19.1
24. BUF: 18.6
25. COL: 18.3
26. CGY: 18.2
27. FLO: 17.8
28. NASH: 17.7
29. TOR: 16.8
30. CAR: 16.7
31. MINN: 16.3

397 wins for the top 15 teams, 399 wins for the bottom 15 teams, with Dallas in the middle. Where'd you find these stats?
 

[LGR4GM]

4 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

397 wins for the top 15 teams, 399 wins for the bottom 15 teams, with Dallas in the middle. Where'd you find these stats?
 

https://www.foxsports.com/nhl/team-stats?season=2019&category=MISCELLANEOUS&group=1&sort=9&time=0&pos=0&team=1&qual=1&sortOrder=0

[Randall Flagg]

3 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

https://www.foxsports.com/nhl/team-stats?season=2019&category=MISCELLANEOUS&group=1&sort=9&time=0&pos=0&team=1&qual=1&sortOrder=0

Thanks.

[Randall Flagg]

I just plotted team ranking versus ranking in hits over a span of the last 6.5 NHL seasons.

I can do blocked shots and faceoff wins tomorrow.

[Randall Flagg]

I'll also get trend lines and stats in there.

[pi2000]

2 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

You keep cherry picking and you keep refusing to show numbers. If team A has 100 hits and team B has 110 hits and team B is Boston and team A is Buffalo, I am suppose to believe those 10 hits matter? Are you serious? 

Here's a great example. Buffalo, 18.6 hits per game. Ottawa 27.4 hits per game. Colorado 18.3 hits per game. St Louis 20.1 hits per game. Chicago 23.3 hit per game. Boston 23.9

Wow, what a great correlation we have. Ottawa the worst team in the league has more hits. Chicago a very bad team in the league has more hits. St Louis the best team in the league has a whipping 1.5 more hits than Buffalo a game. Real game changer that is. 

Here's the list of raw data, since you CONTINUE to refuse to show us that, to show how faulty this really is: Hits per game. I put playoff teams in bold. 

1. NYI: 29.0
2. Pitt: 28.4
3. OTT: 27.4
4. LV: 27.3
5. MON: 27.1
6. WASH: 24.3
7. BOS: 23.9
8. CHI: 23.3
9. WINN: 23.1
10. TB: 22.8
11. DET: 22.4
12. SJ: 22.3
13. NYR: 21.9
14. EDM: 21.9
15. ANA: 21.8
16. DAL: 21.6
17. PHIL: 21.3
18. LAK: 21.1
19. CLBJ: 20.3
20. NJD: 20.2
21. STL: 20.1
22. ARI: 19.5
23. VAN: 19.1
24. BUF: 18.6
25. COL: 18.3
26. CGY: 18.2
27. FLO: 17.8
28. NASH: 17.7
29. TOR: 16.8
30. CAR: 16.7
31. MINN: 16.3

 

 

You're cherry picking hits.    I've already stated, again, that there is no correlation between takeways/60min and winning, and only very slight correlation to hits/60min.

Now do your same analysis for FOW% and blocks/60min.    

[LGR4GM]

1 hour ago, pi2000 said:

You're cherry picking hits.    I've already stated, again, that there is no correlation between takeways/60min and winning, and only very slight correlation to hits/60min.

Now do your same analysis for FOW% and blocks/60min.    

There is no ***** correlation between hits and winning. I'm not cherry picking you literally started this. 

Flagg did faceoffs. 

Why should I do your work for you? You prove there's a correlation and provide the raw numbers for blocks. Or continue to be wrong, either way I don't care. 

 

Edited February 6, 2020 by LGR4GM

[Curt]

Sooo, anyway, with regards to Botterill......

Im on record as saying I think he sold Pegula on a slow rebuild and that his job was safe until after the 2020-21 season.  However, I also think that Pegula is sensitive to the public perception surrounding the team.  I feel like if anything gets Botterill fired, it will be the increased negative press on a national level, and Pegulas reaction to it, even moreso than the team’s poor performance.